Disclaimer: I'm not professionally qualified to make any formal recommendations. I've just done my homework and I'm my own guinea pig. All of my data, unless otherwise cited, comes from a sample size of n=1 (me).

Thanks for the perspective almeeker. Congrats on your weight loss btw! It's been a while since I've been around these parts and I'm impressed!

Thanks. Things have stalled out a little on the scale, but I continue to workout and eat a very clean diet (most days). I know from the past that you and I often take a different stance on certain issues, but that we can meet in the middle with some degree of consensus.

Outside of diet and exercise I happen to think that height plays a roll in how bulky a person looks. I happen to be short with a light frame, so the same size muscle looks much bigger on my arm then it would on a longer or larger one. But I also happen to think that height plays a roll in strength too, it certainly plays a roll in structural engineering. In engineering it's referred to as "slenderness ratio", which basically means that if you have two steel columns of identical cross section, then the shorter one will in fact be the stronger of the two. This is negligible for columns of minimal differences in length, but becomes much more of a factor when the longer column is twice the length of the shorter one. I think it definitely holds true when using the weight machines. I've often felt because of my compact build that I can lift a lot more than taller people, just from the shear physics of the equation.

At my gym there is a 14 yo boy who is close to my height, only his frame looks heavier. He's nearing the school record for dead lift and has already broken the record for bench press. His goal is to smash through all the school records before he graduates. I suppose so long as he doesn't grow a foot taller overnight he'll manage it.

it certainly plays a roll in structural engineering. In engineering it's referred to as "slenderness ratio", which basically means that if you have two steel columns of identical cross section, then the shorter one will in fact be the stronger of the two. This is negligible for columns of minimal differences in length, but becomes much more of a factor when the longer column is twice the length of the shorter one. I think it definitely holds true when using the weight machines. I've often felt because of my compact build that I can lift a lot more than taller people, just from the shear physics of the equation.

That makes sense. I didn't know you spoke engineering! That's what I do in my real life.

Disclaimer: I'm not professionally qualified to make any formal recommendations. I've just done my homework and I'm my own guinea pig. All of my data, unless otherwise cited, comes from a sample size of n=1 (me).

That makes sense. I didn't know you spoke engineering! That's what I do in my real life.

I'm a registered architect, but I also have degrees in Fine Arts and Civil Engineering. I figured you were either an engineer or an accountant. Your posts tend to be very specific, much like engineering.

From what I understand on the subject. You do more sets of less reps at a heavier weight to build muscle mass. The muscle mass you put on from this isn't very dense. Doing less sets at a higher rep count with less weight makes your muscles more dense and stronger instead of really creating any mass. Builders alternate between both.